The Atlantic scores with an essay on the silence, or even support, by evangelical preachers for Donald Trump as compared with the moral indignation they expressed at Bill Clinton’s candidacy.
To them, the allegedly draft-dodging, pot-smoking, honesty-challenged womanizer symbolized everything that was wrong with America.
More than two decades after Clinton’s first inauguration, many evangelical leaders of that era have endorsed the draft-dodging, foul-mouthed, honesty-challenged womanizer named Donald Trump for president.
One exception is Albert Mohler of the Southwest Theological Seminary who says if he supported or endorsed Trump he’d have to apologize to Bill Clinton.
The Atlantic replays some useful comparisons.
The televangelist Pat Robertson once called Clinton a “debauched, debased, and defamed” politician who turned the Oval Office into a “playpen for the sexual freedom of the poster child of the 1960s.” It’s difficult to understand how Robertson could tell Trump recently, “You inspire us all.”
The Republican candidate has been married three times, and it is widely believed that he was unfaithful during each relationship. When he was deposed in the divorce proceedings with his first wife, Ivana, he invoked the Fifth Amendment 97 times to avoid answering questions about questions regarding “other women.” He married his second wife, Marla Maples, two months after she gave birth to their daughter. Until recently, Trump embraced his reputation as a Manhattan womanizer. In case you are wondering, evangelicals typically aren’t big fans of divorce, adultery, or out-of-wedlock pregnancy.
To me, Trump’s sexual history is less troubling than his loose remarks about nuclear weapons, guns, Vladimir Putin, ISIS and more.
Hypocrisy by religious leaders? Say it ain’t so.